X. Leroy. The e#ectiveness of type-based unboxing. In Workshop on Types in Compilation, Amsterdam, June 1997. ACM SIGPLAN. Published as Boston College Computer Science Dept. Technical Report BCCS-97-03.  Home/Search   Document Not in Database   Summary   Related Articles   Check

....programs in which dynamically composed impedence matchers repeatedly wrap and unwrap the same value before nally using it. Leroy describes this and other e ects, before concluding that simpler, non type based approaches may be just as e ective, or even slightly better than, typebased unboxing [10]. A more fundamental problem with applying the Leroy Shao approach to Haskell is that the basic assumption, namely representing product types unboxed by default, fails for a lazy language. Adopting an unboxed representation is not just a representation matter: it a ects the semantics of the ....

X Leroy. The eectiveness of type-based unboxing. In Workshop on Types in Compilation '97. Technical report BCCS-97-03, Boston College, Computer Science Department, June 1997.

....programs in which dynamically composed impedence matchers repeatedly wrap and unwrap the same value before nally using it. Leroy describes this and other e ects, before concluding that simpler, non type based approaches may be just as e ective, or even slightly better than, type based unboxing [9]. A more fundamental problem with applying the Leroy Shao approach to Haskell is that the basic assumption, namely representing product types unboxed by default, fails for a lazy language. Adopting an unboxed representation is not just a representation matter: it a ects the semantics of the ....

X Leroy. The eectiveness of type-based unboxing. In Workshop on Types in Compilation '97. Technical report BCCS-97-03, Boston College, Computer Science Department, June 1997.

....guide the selection of data representations. Type information has been widely used to optimize the implementation of polymorphism. Modeling boxing via coercions that mediate between unboxed and boxed types makes it possible to avoid the boxing of values that are used only in monomorphic contexts [PJL91, Ler92, HJ94, Sha94, SA95, Ler97]. While boxing coercions can improve the compilation of monomorphic functions and data structures, their polymorphic counterparts remain inecient. The most common technique for improving polymorphic code is specialization, which makes monomorphic copies of the polymorphic code for each type at ....

X. Leroy. The eectiveness of type-based unboxing. In Workshop Types in Compilation '97. Technical report BCCS-97-03, Boston College, Computer Science Department, June 1997.

....typechecking, we have initially opted for fixed code sequences but are exploring the implications of the more complicated type systems. Finally, since we chose a type erasure interpretation of polymorphism, adding floats to the language requires a boxing translation. However, recent work by Leroy [24] suggests that it is only important to unbox floats in arrays and within compilation units, which is easily done in our framework. 9 Summary We have given a compiler from System F to a statically typed assembly language. The type system for the assembly language ensures that source level ....

Xavier Leroy. The e#ectiveness of type-based unboxing. In Workshop on Types in Compilation, Amsterdam, June 1997. ACM SIGPLAN. Published as Boston College Computer Science Dept. Technical Report BCCS-97-03.

....typechecking, we have initially opted for fixed code sequences but are exploring the implications of the more complicated type systems. Finally, since we chose a type erasure interpretation of polymorphism, adding floats to the language requires a boxing translation. However, recent work by Leroy [23] suggests that it is only important to unbox floats in arrays and within compilation units, which is easily done in our framework. 7 Summary We have given a compiler from System F to a statically typed assembly language. The type system for the assembly language ensures that source level ....

X. Leroy. The e#ectiveness of type-based unboxing. In Workshop on Types in Compilation, Amsterdam, June 1997. ACM SIGPLAN. Published as Boston College Computer Science Dept. Technical Report BCCS-97-03.

....with the di culties inherent to other methods, have stimulated stronger interest for untyped ow analysis based optimizations. In his ML compiler, Leroy abandons typedirected unboxing for a set of local untyped optimizations combined with a simple ow analysis, and reports encouraging results [9]. Goubault [4] goes further by re ning the worker wrapper model, and suggesting to inline the wrapper, cut into pre processing and post processing parts. He can then eliminate most of the boxing on the basis of a control ow analysis. While there was no concern about complexity in the unboxing ....

X. Leroy. The eectiveness of type-based unboxing. In Proc. International Workshop on Types in Compilation, pages 1-8, 1997.

No context found.

X. Leroy. The e#ectiveness of type-based unboxing. In Workshop on Types in Compilation, Amsterdam, June 1997. ACM SIGPLAN. Published as Boston College Computer Science Dept. Technical Report BCCS-97-03.

No context found.

X. Leroy. The e#ectiveness of type-based unboxing. In Workshop on Types in Compilation, Amsterdam, June 1997. ACM SIGPLAN. Published as Boston College Computer Science Dept. Technical Report BCCS-97-03.

No context found.

X. Leroy. The e#ectiveness of type-based unboxing. In Workshop on Types in Compilation, Amsterdam, June 1997.

No context found.

Xavier Leroy. The e#ectiveness of type-based unboxing. In Workshop on Types in Compilation, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, June 1997. Technical report BCCS-97-03, Boston College, Computer Science Department.

Online articles have much greater impact   More about CiteSeer.IST   Add search form to your site   Submit documents   Feedback  

CiteSeer.IST - Copyright Penn State and NEC